Hi /tg/, tabletop newb here.
I'd like to try out a D&D game, but have no idea of where to start. Where'd you all suggest I begin?
Also, any chances of trying it out for free? I'd kind of like to be sure I'll be playing it more before commiting any money to it.
Pic little to not related.
Just download books through torrents and some other sites. d20srd is also free.
I think 5e is pretty friendly to new players, so just download the book and start reading. If you have friends who would like to play, send them a copy. If you don't, use rolld20 or other online gamefinders.
>>45565279
I'd suggest trying anything other than DnD.
>>45565279
Just find a group first and try out what they're playing anon.
>>45566396
Not OP, but It's hard to play something other than DnD if all the player heard about is DnD. At least be more specific and give advice about better fantasy systems.
>>45565279
Pathfinder is dnd but free-er, with a better online resource than anything Wizards has, (d20pfsrd) although it's still shamefully poorly maintained.
Of course torrenting a bunch of pdf's, or downloading them from pdf threads here on /tg/ can be a good way to go if you're broke but want into 3.5, 4e, or 5th ed.
Personally I recommend starting with Pathfinder and then mixing 3.5 content in once you're comfortable. Insane amount of content with them combined, and they are fairly easy to mix and match with. It's a good introduction to fantasy tabletop roleplaying.
> I'd kind of like to be sure I'll be playing it more before commiting any money to it.
You won't.
Also jesus fuck it's 2016, how can you idiots not google something, and then find a torrent to download it?
Who the fuck raised you?
>in b4 waaahhh y u be mean
>>45566584
Are you looking to DM or play?
D&D can be daunting to learn, but you can do it if you can grok that most challenges are resolved by rolling a d20 then adding the stat modifier of the relevant stat to the task (i.e, strength for swinging an axe at a goblin), and any other bonuses, then asking the dm if it beats the target number representing the task's difficulty, signifying success.
D&D is a combat heavy game, usually played on a grid, but it can be run with other forms of measurement, and non-combat encounters and challenges will often have you test your stats in a manner similar to the way combat is resolved, with a dice roll representing chance for failure, but your character's stats give you a bonus in areas you have trained in.
There are many games other than D&D, some of them are better for mystery or horror genre games, where talk, clue finding and fleeing for your life through eerie locales might be more prevalent than combat like in Call of Ch'thulhu, a d100 based game system of the BRP (Basic Role Playing) family, an easy to learn group of games that includes gems like Runequest, which is a more combat and heroic mythology oriented game, with a rather different approach to building a fantasy world than D&D, being built originally for and deeply influenced by Greg Stafford's "Glorantha", it's original and best setting, it provides more lethal combat with hit areas for crippling wounds, and has less emphasis on good versus evil, more on the feuds, histories and mythologies of conflicting peoples as experienced from one side or another. Notably, neither of these games have that famous D&D alignment system, which allows for more moral grey areas where you can't just cast "detect evil", COC has a mechanic that tracks Sanity, your character losing his mind essentially being an alternative way to "die", because COC is not a game about good versus evil, it is a game about losing your mind to cosmic horrors that man was never meant to dwell upon.
>>45566396
>tips fedora
>>45565279
Unless you've got a friend who's into it, or are willing to start up a local sect, your infatuation will likely consist of a brief curiosity, followed by horror at the size of the rulebook, and the idea that it may take forty minutes to walk a particularly thick headed new player through character creation alone.
Unless the idea of playing games completely unbound by the constrictions of programming, where an experienced GM can generate new content on the fly is more important to you than the fear of wasting hundreds of hours of your life on something that is difficult, time consuming, unrewarding if done with people who aren't on the same level, and may get you expelled from Baptist churches.
If you can still answer yes, maybe you'll stick at it.
>>45570356
>new player
>I would recommend the crunchy systems
Well played bro, keep the hobby esoteric
>>45570786
>I think new people are too retarded to play one of the most simple tabletop systems ever
Well played , keep the hobby filled with troglodytes who can't operate if dice are involved.
>>45570835
truth.
>>45570835
Yeah, it's the dice that make 3.p hard, not the overemphasis on rules.
5e is better for beginners, and if they prefer a more mechanically oriented game, then they can and should transition to Pathfinder or DnD 3.5
>>45570356
>I recommend starting with Pathfinder
Fuck off.
>>45570975
D&D is one of the most simple systems, meant to be an introduction into tabletop. If I could figure out the rules when I was in middle school, it shouldn't be that difficult for most people.
>>45571010
I would still recommend 5e. If I had to recruit new players and I showed them the character sheets for Pathfinder and DnD 5e, which do you think they would choose knowing that it must be filled out before they could start playing?
>>45566396
I do have a Deatwatch and SW:EotG core rulebook laying around...
>>45570453
Was planning to' but why torrent if there's chance of finding something potentially more recent for free?
>>45570603
I'd love to DM, but I'm not sure I'd have the patience since I tend to be married to my storylines and would most likely try to railroad the thing...
>>45570766
I know a friend through a friend whom might be willing to set up a game if I provide the necesseties.
>>45571185
5e is only slightly more easy, but also costs money, which pathfinder more or less doesn't (though as >>45566191 said just find a torrent if money matters)
Pathfinder is a little better than 5e for a starter though I feel because 5e gives a lot less choices for the players, so unless they're more experienced and know how to make diverse characters within the confines of the system, they'll be pretty bored with the options.
>>45571409
>Pathfinder is a little better than 5e for a starter though
No. Pathfinder is an atrocious starter system.
>>45571409
I will agree with you that Pathfinder is easier to get into, has a lot more extra stuff to inspire players, and is published by a better company. I will not agree that players will be bored with only 150+ different kinds of characters. I think new players just want to make a rogue and play; I don't think "if only there were 40 more types of rogue to research" is a common complaint. I could be wrong.
>>45571409
Because new players should learn out of the gate that mechanical decisions are totally more important than understanding who their character IS, because they're roll-playing games, not roleplaying games.
5e is fun and easy for beginners. Anyone who says otherwise is being an elitist, and elitists are what make mainstream society think that we're all a bunch of insufferable neckbeards. (Which, I mean, we mostly are.)
>>45571617
I just got d10 inspiration from that. Wanna go kill some orcs?
>>45571647
>>45571617
But I said player's should focus on how there characters is, not the mecahnics, unless you weren't be sarcastic, which just means you're retarded.
>elitists are what make mainstream society think that we're all a bunch of insufferable neckbeards
>Using Bane quotes
>Not even using ones that make fun of his accent
>>45571893
>player's should focus on how there characters is, not the mecahnics
This is the worst possible idea in 3.PF.
>>45571893
Of course I was being sarcastic. But you seemed to imply that the simplicity of choice in 5e is what makes it lose out to PF as a system for newbies, while in my experience new players have always found the amount of specific mechanical customization of 3/3.5/PF to be daunting.
Starting with basic and simple and not as many choices is better for getting somebody's foot in the door, while Pathfinder in specific is better for experienced players who understand how to better fill a character in with customization options.
>>45572006
Except that the simplicity does make it harder for new players. Often times new players need a lot of options if they want to make something (storywise) unique. A limited class list for a new player is also a limited personality list.
>>45571992
Exactly. It can be a good system if you know what you're doing, but 5e is superior in terms of teaching someone how to play a TTRPG.
>>45572028
Thank god that personalities are tied to backgrounds, which of there's a fuckload, and not to classes then.
And that's assuming you are not just plain fucking wrong. PF is a shit beginner system. None of its merits show for new players. It's also a shit expert system, but at least some of its merits can be exploited by experts.
>>45572037
>It can be a mediocre system if you know what you're doing
FTFY.
Seriously, PF needs a complete overhaul.
>>45572028
Fair point...but I still hold fast to the belief that characterization outside of the math is best for new players.
I also feel like a strong DM, and 5e's inclusion of character backgrounds do a better job of giving new players a first look at what roleplaying has to offer, and like I said, in my experience, too many customization options tends to overwhelm new players.
>>45572109
OP here, not my place to say maybe, but I think I'd like more choice instead of not having access to something.
>>45572264
And if half those choices seem like good ideas, but make your character functionally useless?
>>45572310
It'd be nice to know that they are useless, but I'd still like to have the option to do stupid stuff to my character.
>>45572264
The point I'm trying to make is that new players should not be taught that interesting, cool, compelling characters are not created by numbers on a piece of paper...they're developed largely outside of the context of the rules.
At least the way me and mine see it, it's better to have the character visualized as a living breathing thing that maybe can't be 100% how you like it than to be an uninteresting blob of powerful/advantageous game mechanics.
And while I do understand that advanced customization options can help someone better visualize their character, I always recommend to new players that they allow the rules to take a back seat to their own imagination (at least for the first run through) and create their characters alongside an experienced player/their DM, as opposed to saying "here's the book, figure it out."
>>45572382
Fuck, meant to say "are created by"*
>>45572375
>It'd be nice to know that they are useless,
That's the opposite of 3.PF. One of the designers for 3.X is on record as saying that they tried to make creating a D&D character like creating a MtG deck: Full of hidden traps.
>>45572431
Well, talk about douchebag designers. Well, in that case I'd rather have something 'clearer', something that allows me to know what the bloody fuck I'm actually doing.
>>45565279
>>45565279
>>45565279
SEE WHAT YOU'VE WROUGHT, OP?! NEVER UTTER THESE FORBIDDEN WORDS TOGETHER IN HERE EVER AGAIN, "D&D" AND "NEWBIE".
NOW GO AND PLAY SAVAGE WORLDS OR BARBARIANS OF LEMURIA, OR FATE ACCELERATED, AND HAVE FUN WITH TABLETOP, OP.
>>45572510
>SW
>BoL
>FAE
What's the matter, got numerophobia?
Play GURPS too, OP. Or AD&D 2e, if you need your D&D.
>>45572488
It gets worse: One of the designers for Pathfinder nerfed weapon cords because he tried tying his mouse to his wrist by the cord, then getting it into his hand.
>>45572510
I don't quite see the problem with a little discussion, but whatever?
>>45572531
I suppose those people exist as well. So you're basically saying I should with the core book for now cuz douchebag designers.
>>45571409
No, no, no.
Pathfinder's an awful starter system. I'm saying this as someone who's run it for six years. It's complex, crunchy, it's hard to make a character that doesn't have a totally gimped build.
You're not gonna be "bored with options" in your first game. For a starter system, you want something that's easy and fast to run.
5e isn't perfect for that either, but it's a thousand times better than Pathfinder.
>>45572573
I should stick with*
>>45572573
>I should with the core book
The core book is the most broken part of 3.X. I'm not certain about the relative quality of PF's core book, but I do know that /pfg/ usually recommends replacing as much Paizo stuff as possible with Dreamscarred Press stuff. Ask them if you want to know more.
>>45565279
Just keep in mind that D&D is good if you want to pick a game with a lot of players BUT, it's not exactly rules-light and beginner friendly, the people who say that are just comparing it to other versions of D&D that were worse about that particular part.
If you want to play pen and paper role-playing games with some friends, just try to find a rules-light or even a one-page rules system. At the end of the day, it's you guys that are making the game fun, just picking up D&D and following the instructions on the box isn't going to knock your socks off.
The most common reason from game groups never getting off the ground or dying prematurely is this: People are excited about being cool adventurers or getting involved in amazing stuff, or they've seen game of thrones and suddenly became fantasy nerds, whatever. They're fucking pumped. THEN, they sit down at the table and there's a 300 page book of rules that tells them how to play. And they need to learn how to make a character before they can make the character they imagined all along. And then they realize that the way the game handles some particular thing makes their character kinda lame compared to what they imagined. And all the fire goes out of them.
If you're a new player, playing with other new players, you should pick a system that gets you up and running as soon as possible, because as soon as the game starts involving a bunch of stuff that feels like a chore (before you know the rules by heart, then it's a breeze) you're going to turn people off and lose players.
>>45572573
>>45572531
It's really just a shitstorm of people failing to communicate with eachother, that was brought to life by mistaking D&D for all the tabletop games there are, which is a rookie mistake, admittedly.
>ADnD 2e
>GURPS
that's solid, actually, but i just listed off the ones easiest to get into and breaking the mold a little
One thing to keep in mind, OP: whereas for most games newer editions mean updates and facelifts to the game, in D&D each edition past ADnD has been a complete overhaul, so D&D edition wars are really comparing apples to oranges, since ADnD, 3.pf, 4e and 5e all play drastically different.
I can't believe there're assholes in this thread recommending Pathfinder as an easy starter system.
While the amount of resources and established player base might make it a good first choice for other reasons, recommending Pathfinder because it's easy to learn is fucking retarded. If you only know two systems period, chances are the second system is going to be easier to get into than Pathfinder so long as it's not 3.5.
>>45572630
GURPS Lite is pretty easy to get into, although the system does lend itself to choice paralysis very well.
>>45571409
>New players need hundreds of trap options and customization for the sake of customization to stay entertained.
This is the opposite of true.
>>45572264
I am the guy that first suggested DnD 5e. I would like to bring this back to Earth. Caps locks guy scared me.
Step 1: steal DnD 5e Players Handbook from the internet
Step 2: steal Lost Mines of Phandelver (you don't need the Dungeon Masters Guide or Monster Manual)
Step 3: run the game (it should take 3-5 sessions)
Step 4: ask the players if they found it too simplistic and want to try something a bit more complex.
At this point, you've not had to invest anything more than time and the group will be better prepared for 3/pf if they swing that way. If they want to stick with 5e, you can run some Adventures League stuff or make your own.
>>45572073
If Pathfinder is equal to 3.5 editions, then would Pathfinder 2 make it DnD 7th edition?
>>45572718
Could probably simplify this even more by just running whatever the fuck Wizard's includes in the 5e starter kit that they offer for free.
Should have Fighter, Cleric, Rogue and Wizard with a simple dungeon.
>>45572669
Honestly it's kind of cultural. American rpg players compare everything to some version of D&D and many haven't really tried much else, and compared to that anything is beginner friendly.
Beginner friendly for me is like 100 pages for rules, monsters and a starter adventure.
>>45571409
It's worth noting that the ability to easily search virtually all Pathfinder rules, classes, basic guides to running a game, etc, all on the same website, makes it a lot easier to start than most other DnD variants. Especially as a DM, because it's a lot easier to wing it with a bit of creativity and look up rules on the fly as needed once you've read up on the basics of starting the game.
Also, tabletop games with more detailed rules tend to be a lot easier for inexperienced RPers to get into since you almost always have a standard rules as written solution to most disputes.
A lot of the neckbeard fags in this thread are going to winge on forever about how, oh no, pathfinder has rules, rules are evil. gasp.
In reality, rules make tabletop games much easier to slip into at first because you can avoid a lot of inter-group arguments/complaints/that guy problems. Rules-lite games, or ignoring/ditching some rules in more rules heavy games works better once you're more experienced and have a decent group to play with so you don't have to deal with as much foggy territory in terms of rules.
Whether you pick some classic DnD like pathfinder, or what to go for one of the better low rules systems like Fate, I'd highly recommend picking something with a decent online resource like the pfsrd. A few different systems have extensive online resources that compile their content by topic and make it easily searchable, and it will save you a lot of time digging through pdf's and spare you actually needing to read a DM handbook cover to cover or some other such horror.
>>45572771
>classic DnD like pathfinder
IT'S FINALLY HAPPENED
PATHFINDER IS NOW "CLASSIC"
END MY LIFE
>>45572718
Honestly, the only point in PF's favor is greater breadth of cutomization. Most of the added mechanical complexity is just because the system's a houseruled hackjob based on a system that's 15 years old.
If his players decided they want to customize more then they can in 5e, they can play a point buy character generation system.
>>45572771
We're not ripping on PF because it's rules-heavy, we're ripping on it because it's shit.
>>45572764
Pretty sure that's what you get from the Starter kit.
>>45572771
The PFSRD is the only point in Pathfinder's favor. In every other way, any other game would be better.
>>45572764
Even if someone is a flaming newfag like that namefag over there, and their immediate comparison is 4e or 5e, those should be obvious better choices than 3.X variants.
The ideal system a new player should learn from should teach them the fundamental abilities to use across multiple roleplaying games, and the rules should be streamlined to keep them in the game as much as possible. Pathfinder doesn't achieve either of these.
Contrary to what some people might think, the 3.X design philosophies are very far placed on simulationist side of tabletop and even if you're of the opinion that Pathfinder is the best system on the market, you should not think it's a decent middle of the road option if you appreciate it for what it is worth. The typical methods used in Pathfinder do not carry over to most other games.
Being simulationist also means that there's constant referring back to the rulebook for resolution of things, because so many things resolve differently and there's so much crunch to refer to. The existence of the PFSRD alleviates these issues, but it does NOT carry an advantage over other systems in this regard. If you're learning by 5e, you can refer to everything necessary in a starter adventure using the core book as a reference. Everything resolves under a consistent ruleset here, and it encourages the use of personal calls instead of risking breaking under the weight of house rules due to obscure interactions.
I'd recommend Savage Worlds or Fate or hell, Legend of the Wulin over a simulationist system. My top recommendation is probably something like Everybody is John. But if I had to recommend something like PF that isn't PF, 5e and Fantasy Craft are a much better start.
>>45572883
Nothing wrong with a good bit of simulationism.
>>45571409
5e is kinda like the Dragon Age II of rpg systems.
AAAWESOME.
>>45571615
Having 150 options isn't good because players reasonably would want to play 150 different classes or some such, but rather it's great because if you have an idea for what you want to do, you can probably do it, and probably in a way that's a bit more well rounded and fleshed out than what's in your head.
It makes it easy to have 5 different people who have played 5 different classes each, and yet have no one who has played the same class/race combo as someone else. Which keeps things fresh, but more importantly when you're new, especially compared to some systems that don't have much published yet, you can probably play anything you can think of in a fantasy setting.
>>45571617
oh shit, I think I have some cancer meds left from the power gaming thread somewhere around here. . . . fuck!
>>45572028
Egxactly.
>>45572382
From experience trying to start up a few different systems with inexperienced friends; playing with a particular system doesn't really help with this. What helps with this is either just playing more, or playing with people who have experience. Preferably both.
>>45572531
>Play GURPS too, OP. Or AD&D 2e, if you need your D&D.
now that's hilarious.
>>45572576
Same old shit from before bruh, still doesn't make sense.
>>45572669
Op asked about playing DnD, Pathfinder is probably the best starter DnD system.
Are we just arguing against one fucker with a massive boner for 5e?
>>45572672
Nothing about GRUPS is really easy to get into, although it is kind of the pinnacle of a system that shines once you learn a truly absurd mountain of material. Still want to run another game in it but the time investment to get going properly scared off my players.
>>45572764
Sit down with laptop, run DnD session.
That's how I started with pathfinder, and tabletop in general. 99.99% of prep work was some story writing and like 10 minutes opening tabs.
>>45572910
That's a bit too much b8 there, m80. Nobody's going to bite.Who am I kidding, /tg is full of morons who'll bite that shit.
>>45572898
I apologize, my personal taste dug in there a bit.
I do think narrative systems are better for teaching though. My preferences aside, the main advantage to them in this field is that they usually have simple resolution mechanics and light character creation.
Providing a new player with MORE options, whether they're meaningful or just padding, is not a good idea if you want them to learn. A player should get into the game by getting into it, they shouldn't have to spend much time in set-up.
Pathfinder was the first system I ever learned and I remember the whole motion of looking at character creation, getting intimidated by the mass, finding a concept I liked a lot, getting excited to play it, then being horribly disappointed by how much weaker I was than other characters because dexterity monks are a lie.
>>45572924
It's like Virt had a child, only instead of being malicious, the child had Downs.
>>45572942
I think that, as a learning experience, every new player should have a stab at FATE, GURPS (Lite), and... what else? AD&D 2e? SavWorlds? Call of Cthulhu?
>>45572883
5e is just a really bad introduction to DnD.
There's a pretty solid choice of RPG systems that are not DnD out there (fate is one of the better ones at actually introducing people to Roleplaying), but if you want to play DnD, 3.5/pathfinder combo really takes the cake. More content, easy to start in due to online resources, old (and thus tons of fan guides/information/gaming resources, etc out there), doesn't play like it's trying to be a video game.
Simple and vague != good for new players.
Honestly most of the advice in this thread is rooted in this idea that new players need a stick shoved up their ass and used to steer them in a particular direction or they won't learn how to tabletop, which is pretty ridiculous.
>>45572910
I was talking about DnD 5e having 150+ race/class/archetype combos. Pathfinder guy seemed to think 5e doesn't offer enough options to be interesting. Honestly, I wish they would stop with the UA releases. We don't need seperate rules for a light cleric, a sun cleric, and a photon cleric: that's what RP is for.
Find a group
Avoid people who play Pathfinder(or try to tell you that PF is a good game for first time players)
Remember that EVERYONE at the table is there to have fun, not just you or the players
>>45573001
>More content, easy to start in due to online resources, old (and thus tons of fan guides/information/gaming resources, etc out there), doesn't play like it's trying to be a video game.
The same could be said for AD&D.
>>45573001
'Samefagging fanboy' prestige classed into 'namefagging shill'
>>45571409
>>45570835
Pathfinder is goddamn TERRIBLE system for beginners. Kindly go kill yourselves.
>>45573004
I'm part of the camp that's strongly recommending 5e, but I'd really like more splatbooks personally. I do think there're enough options to last most players some years, but I'm the kind of guy who'll roll the same class every campaign and build it differently each time. I am quickly running out of Paladin options.
>>45572264
Pathfinder doesn't have more choices, it only has the APPEARANCE of more choices, unless you don't mind your character being terrible at what you're trying to do.
>>45573024
AD&D is better, though, since it's very hard to make a non-viable character without actually trying, and the available options can be added during play easily.
>>45572573
>So you're basically saying I should with the core book for now cuz douchebag designers.
That was the lead designer and the person who MADE most of the pathfinder corebook.
>>45573024
Yeah, although to a lesser extent.
It's old enough I kind of suspect that at this point the cultural influences surrounding it might turn off some new players, depending on age group. It actually makes me kind of more interested in it but DnD was something I got into post-adulthood.
Besides that though, the combat got cleaned up a lot on the way to 3.5+.
>>45573049
I feel like paladin rarely has as many interesting alternate features as it deserves in most things that have paladins. :(
>>45573069
>Besides that though, the combat got cleaned up a lot on the way to 3.5+.
With the addition of things like AoOs, 3.x combat is actually messier than AD&D ever was.
>>45573069
>a lesser extent.
26 years of roughly compatible content is now 'a lesser extent'?
>>45573049
Splatbooks are preferable to UA because they give more context and are better for DMs, so I will agree with you there.
>>45573023
>Find a group
>Avoid people who play Pathfinder(or try to tell you that PF is a good game for first time players)
>Remember that EVERYONE at the table is there to have fun, not just you or the players
Basically avoid toxic cunts like this guy.
Sweet jesus the butthurt is real. Even if I, for very good reasons, think Pathfinder is a great system for new players, and amazingly easy to start DMing in, I'm hardly going to kneecap myself out of playing/running a variety of systems because I'm too busy fapping over system X.
There's a lot of interesting roleplaying systems out there and if you find yourself having fun with whatever you start one, there's probably some weird obscure bullshit out there that will tickle your fancy, so try new shit out.
>>45573107
It's years older, but it didn't turn out the same degree of raw stuff on the internet over those years, probably just by virtue of that being largely the 90s, and I was also referring to the online resources not being quite as well set up, although maybe it's not by much. If they actually paid someone to maintain the PFSRD it'd probably be amazing, but obviously that is not a thing that happens.
>>45573126
You're wrong, though. Pathfinder is a terrible system for new players. It's messy, it's complex, it's full of trap options and it inflicts stockholm syndrome and makes people refuse to learn any other systems because they think learningany other system is going to be just as hard.
>>45572510
Nah, Fate Core, but that condensed version that's floating around. Accelerated took way too much off the top.
>>45572624
>dat filename
top kek
dear god is that ship namefag an autistic cunt. Tantrum harder, faggot
>muh 3.pf
>muh content
>muh options
>purfect for beginers
>lol mathphobes
>>45573126
>Remember that EVERYONE at the table is there to have fun
>toxic
What sort of ass-backwards games are you playing?
>>45573937
Pathfinder.
>>45571403
Virt pls go.
>>45565279
OP, if you are still here I would like to tell you about a guy who went to 4chan for computer advice and was enthusiastically told by scumbags to delete system 32. One of those types of people is in this thread and it is pretty obvious who it is. Don't go down that path OP, don't delete system 32.
>>45574102
Oh, so you're not supposed to delete that? Oops. That explains a lot.
So, OP again here. So in short, if I want to start I ought to try out D&D Ed. 5, Pathfinder or possible AD&D, right?
>>45574964
Don't pay attention to the troll, you absolutely should NOT start with Pathfinder if you have any choice in the matter.
>>45574964
5e is what I would recommend, possibly AD&D if you have someone experienced with it to help guide your hips.
The starter set is only $12 on Amazon right now, but you don't actually need to buy it to get more-or-less the same experience (though the starter set would probably be a tad easier and less intimidating overall). The Basic rules are free, the SRD is free, there are plenty of premade characters on their website, and there are a good number of free official adventures on DMsGuild.com. You'd mostly just need to buy a set of gaming dice.
>>45575284
>free official adventures
Well, brainfart--I meant UNofficial adventures.
>>45575284
Well, that link is nice to know about. Here, have a chocotoff.
>>45574964
>Pathfinder - Legally free to start with, super easy to just pick up and play if you're willing to look stuff up via PFSRD as you go.
>5e Character creation / gameplay doesn't involve as many choices, but consequently, you won't have to deal with as much
>AD&D - The true original D&D experience, but you'll have to deal with THAC0 and some other horrifying things that really deserved to die when wizards moved on from AD&D. Maybe better for your second experience.
Maybe read up on each briefly yourself, there's an insane number of fapping fanboys and trolls in this thread.
>>45577766
If you think the only problem with PF is that 'it's got more choices', then you actually don't realize why people are recommending people stay away from it.
Pathfinder is a broken mess where some characters are flat out better then others, to the point where other characters are useless. This isn't hard to do. If the party has a monk and a druid, the monk's going to feel like shit.
But that's just the start. There are countless places where 5e is better then PF.
>Grapple rules that don't require a flowchart.
>Skills that won't become useless half-way through the game.
>Bounded accuracy, so that skill check DC's don't have to be astronomical just to give the specialists a bare chance of failure.
>Reigned in spellcasting, with frequent use of Concentration to keep spells from stacking, and no ever-present magical marketplace of scrolls and wands that allow spellcasters to always have the solutions to the situations problems on hand.
>Background system that's written to help new players think in-character, which a great tool for teaching.
This a handful of reasons, but I could keep going. Pathfinder's online resources are great, but that's it. In every other way, especially in regards to teaching new people how to play, 5e is a superior game.
>>45574964
If you don't NEED to play THE D&D and are willing to try some tabletop RPGs instead:
>Savage Worlds
very simple resolution, combat that requires planning and accounting for, classless, can do anything from fantasy to scifi with minor tweaks, and it's basically GURPS younger, more hip brother, combat flows very fast and martial characters aren't gimped or short on options, ~200 page base rulebook, of which a player absolutely needs to know maybe 50 pgs, the GM at worst 100
>FATE Accelerated
Circa 40 pages rulebook for a game with interesting premise - you don't always act as your character, but on good rolls you get to influence the circumstances - making use of and creating new advantages and disadvantages in all sorts of situations. Based on proprietary dice, but can be circumvented with regular d6s no problem
>Barbarians of Lemuria
From what the Lemuria-fag anon writes, its also a very light at heart system, the biggest book is 200 pages, but the core rules is only about 40.
Other games I've heard good things about would be 13th Age and FantasyCraft.
OH, and for oldschool gaming on the cheap, theres a FUCKTON of free OSR retroclones for anything from zeroth edition DND to 2eADND rewrites for free:
http://www.howlingtower.com/p/old-school-renaissance-resources.html
...but let's not pretend that cost of the game has any meaning, when you can head into any of the dozen PDF threads that pop up each week and grab any of the most popularm aterial for free anyway.
>>45570999
Fuck yourself to death pls
So, I'm just going to jump right into this thread. I've very rarely played tabletop RPG's before, I've never been in a campaign that got finished, having gone through half of three separate campaigns before they imploded. Now, a bunch of my friends (who weren't present for those shitty campaigns) have convinced me to DM a Stars Without Number campaign for them. I'm a good story teller and understand the confines of RPG story telling (always assume players are going to foil your plans so don't be to set in stone about a stories direction) but this is my first time doing this sort of thing. So, I've got the SWoN core rulebook to go through, but are there any tips or tools that you lot would recommend for a first time GM? Also, this is my first post to /tg/ so please be merciful if I'm a bit slow on the uptake.
>>45578696
You want to make a Star without Numbers thread, since people that know that system aren't going to see your question in a DnD thread.
Read the GM advice section in your games corebook. Stars Without Numbers seems to be mostly preoccupied with telling you how to GM Stars, and how that makes it different from other RPG's you've played. That means it assumes you've already played something else.
>>45579538
well shit. I'll get around to doing that tonight. Thanks stranger.
>>45579602
In a general sense, it looks SWoN is based on 2nd edition DnD, so, maybe look up tips for AD&D DM'ing
>>45574964
Anything but Pathfinder.
>>45574964
5e is the best way to get into the DnD family of RPGs bar none. Even if you end up hating the system, it's going to be better to start off with it to figure out where to go next.
>>45578333
Aside from the fact that half your post is just extrapolating bullshit that I didn't bring up
>5e grapple rules are an unmitigated clusterfuck, much like PF and 3.5. Probably everyone should avoid grapple in all 3 systems at all costs unless you want to end up disappointed and angry.
>Skills that don't become useless?
Eh, dubious. Mostly it's much the same issues with previous skill systems, except for the fact that the progression is more of an illusion than a fact and some things are still overshadowed as you slowly step towards near-godhood
>Accuracy.
While true, whether or not this is an improvement is debatable.
>Spellcasting.
Literally the only incontestable point here.
>Backgrounds
That's just a matter of opinion, and it's really going to depend on who's playing. There's nothing inherently helpful about the system, it's not an "amazing teaching tool." You'll do just fine without it, or with it. /shrug. If for some reason you like pre-genned backgrounds thats great for you I suppose but it's not inherently helpful to new players to take part of character creation out of there hands.
If anything, Fate actually has something interesting going on in this regard instead of the 5e herpaderp let's just put something in for people who don't want to work much on the roleplay aspect.
>>45580344
>If for some reason you like pre-genned backgrounds thats great for you I suppose but it's not inherently helpful to new players to take part of character creation out of there hands.
Dude what.
Backgrounds take as much out of the player's hands as classes and races do. Fuck its spelled out in the PHB that creating your own backgrounds is fine and dandy.
Why do 3eaboos straight make shit up about other systems instead of attacking the actual weaknesses of said systems?
>>45580779
Stockholm syndrome. They can't comprehend that there are systems that don't suck.
lots of arguments in this thread so instead of fighting with them, i'll just tell you my experience. That is if you're still here OP, or for anyone else who might find themselves in this situation
After browsing tg for a while and getting into some quests and reading d&d threads, i decided this is something i wanted to get into. I talked to my gf and she showed a little interest, and offered to try it, but obviously we would need more people or a place to start. so i shelved that idea for a while. I saw mythweavers mentioned in a thread here and thought i'd try it out. i applied for three games, pf, 5e, and pf. i found pf was harder to create a character knowing basically no rules. of course i had already downloaded and read most of the phb for each, but not knowing how to play the games, the rules just turn into rambling words after a while. the people on mythweavers were very nice and helpful in creating characters even though i was not accepted for any out of the 3 i applied for.
well fuck
kinda lost my steam there for a while and just about a month ago i decided to give it a go again. but this time i actually wanted to do it tabletop not online. i started watching gameplay videos online and found a lot of 5e beginner videos. wasd20 on youtube had some great ones along with dungeons & dragons running a preview of the new(at the time) 5e starter set. i decided that was what i wanted to do. so i went and asked my sister and her husband if they'd be interested in trying it. they said sure. great, now we had 4 people totally new and no one to dm. i thought i could try to dm, yeah me having no experience in even playing decided to dm. so i got the starter set(available for $19 at the lgs) and read through it and watched all of the preview of the starter set that dungeons & dragons(official channel on youtube) put out. rules started making more and more sense and i got more confident about dming. i bought the starter set not even a week ago.
cont.
>>45582520
so the set contains everything needed to run an adventure including a set of dice. we started our adventure saturday and i felt like i maybe even over-prepared. everything went swimmingly and they all loved it and are eager to play again, maybe tonight or tomorrow already. sure its a pain to pass the dice around i messed up on a few rules, which was expected as we are all new, but it was easy. the set comes with pre-made characters that blend perfectly into the adventure and i decided we should run it with those so that everyone can get a feel for the dice and what different stats mean and do. i explained to them that a big part of the fun(imo) is in creating and fleshing out your character but i wanted to do it this way to see if they would like it and if so we could run another adventure and go through character creation. i can't really speak to all of pf, but i personally thought it would be easier to go with 5e. i was nervous and scared but now i'm excited and eager to play more and i think i owe a lot of that to the starter set. i think someone who is fairly competent would be able to pick up the set flip though the adventure book and run that adventure. it walks you through the rules as you begin the adventure and tells you, as the dm, when to do what. the adventure is for 4 or 5 but running with 3 hasn't been a problem yet and i plan on scaling sown some of the more numerous encounters.
i hope that helps because it was a fuckton of typing
